RE: [ihc] Joel's 4.25" Backspacing

["Peter Shubin" <pshubin@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I went with 16 inch rims for the same reason it sounds like you avoided
them, cost.  I priced both 15 inch and 16 inch tire packages and found, just
as you did, that the 15 inch packages are lower in cost than the 16 inch but
since both setups were so expensive new I wanted to avoid buying new until I
found what I really wanted.  

 

My Scout II has what is listed as a four inch suspension lift and a two inch
body lift.  I also reshaped the wheel wheels when I did some rust repair a
few years back.  Since I didn't know if I wanted 33s or 35s with this set up
I hunted around for either and found a good set of BFG All Terrain 285/75R16
with a little over 50% tread for $150.  I found that there were very few
good used 15 inch tires available but lots of good "medium sized" 16 inch
tires advertised.  Most people I called told me things like, "The tires are
in good shape.  I just went bigger."  I found a guy in Colton, California
that deals in take offs and actually sells 16 inch tires for less than the
15 inch tires because he gets so many of them.  After finding the tires I
bought the rims with the back spacing I wanted to match for about $36 more
than the 15 inch rims would have cost.  Total cost of the combined tire and
wheel package was around $370 and my time.  

 

My other reasons for going with the 16 inch rims are not that compelling but
still weighed into the decision.

*        Both my daily driver Explorer and my wife's Suburban both have 16
inch rims.  

*        I have not found the axles for my 800 project yet and have not
ruled out going with some large axles with large brakes that would require
16 inch rims.  Even if I use the Scout II front Dana 44 I have and find a
matching rear I will still search for bigger brakes.

*        I can find spare 16 inch used tires fairly easily.

*        The Scout II is a worker for various projects I do and often
carries relatively heavy loads.  The D rated tires and the stiff Rancho
springs are 2/3 of the rear end drive train and suspension upgrade I have
planned in my head.

*        I now have an extra set of 15 inch rims with 31s for construction
of my 800 project.  (It is a postal and being converted from 5 on 4.5 to 5
on 5.5 due to the initial axle changes while I build the suspension.

 

I don't think you missed anything.  I'm still curious about Joel's spacing
though.  I can find 16x8 wheels with 4.5 inches of back spacing and a 5 on
5.5 bolt pattern in almost every wheel I considered.  It seems the Dodge
1500 uses this wheel from the factory.  I have not fitted it yet but I
speculate this would be perfect for my 800 with Scout II axles if I don't
create a wheel to knuckle clearance problem.

 

Pete

 

-----Original Message-----
------------------------------

 

Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 12:48:50 -0700

From: Tom Harais <THarais@domain.elided>

Subject: RE: [ihc] Joel's 4.25" Backspacing

 

Pete:

 

May I ask why you chose to go with the 16" wheels and tires?

 

I considered doing the same thing when I acquired some new wheels.  I

figured the 16" were becoming so popular and I could get the same overall

diameter or better than a 31/10.50/15 in various widths (other than just

10.50).  I checked a few tire website size specs to confirm this.  And, I

checked availability of 16" wheels with the 5" on 5.5" lug pattern.

 

I finally decided to stay with 15" wheels and the LT flotation sized tires,

mostly for economic reasons.  The 16" tires (and wheels IIRC) were 10%-20%

more than the good old 10.50/15s.  And, there were other options in the 15"

sizes as well.  Thus, I couldn't see any real advantage to going to 16"

wheels and tires.

 

But, your reference makes me wonder if I missed something.

 

 

 

Tom H., '87 Traveler